Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Crucial M500 SSD Promises 960GB For $600

Posted by Unknown on from the please-send-three dept.

crookedvulture writes "SSD prices are falling as drive makers start using next-generation NAND built on smaller fabrication processes. Micron and Crucial have announced a new M500 drive that's particularly aggressive on that front, promising 960GB for just $600, or about $0.63 per gigabyte. SSDs in the terabyte range currently cost $1,000 and up, so the new model represents substantial savings; you can thank the move to 20-nm MLC NAND for the price reduction. Although the 960GB version will be limited to a 2.5" form factor, there will be mSATA and NGFF-based variants with 120-480GB of storage. The M500 is rated for peak read and write speeds of 500 and 400MB/s, respectively, and it can crunch 80k random 4KB IOps. Crucial covers the drive with a three-year warranty and rates it for 72TB of total bytes written. Expect the M500 to be available this quarter as both a standalone drive and inside pre-built systems."

5 of 144 comments (clear)

  1. 72 TB is not a lot of data written by schlachter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seems like this kind of drive is best suited for read only focused applications. Depending on what you're doing you could write 72TB pretty quickly on a 1TB drive.

    --
    My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
    1. Re:72 TB is not a lot of data written by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Of course SLC is still around, for people like you who fail to realize that a disk with almost 10 times the capacity but 1/10th the per block endurance is just as reliable if the bigger capacity isn't used, thanks to wear leveling, and probably much faster due to parallel access to more chips.

  2. SSD replacements? by girlintraining · · Score: 1, Insightful

    While it's nice to see SSD capacities increasing, the real metric is the cost per gigabyte, which is still nowhere near conventional harddrives. A good number of us have massive multimedia collections; It's still cost-prohibitive to store all of it on SSDs. And at least for the short-term, a primary drive over 200GB isn't really something most users need. A select few, perhaps, but not many. This may be something more useful in the enterprise, but then... looking at the specs, it seems it wouldn't survive very long in a database server.

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
  3. Re:Still a ways to go by sdguero · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just get a 120 or 250 GB on sale for your OS and applications. Keep your data on a traditional HDD.

    It's worth it dude. Trust me. The upgrade to SSD was the most noticeable single component upgrade I've ever done to one of my machines.

  4. Re:That's great, but... by jones_supa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Do I have to click the link to see what "this" might be?